An Answer to the Vindication of Doctor Hammond, Text
The Introduction.
IT is a truth in it ſelf, and very obvious to knowing men, that the uſe of language is for the expreſſion of our conceptions; and that theſe are cauſed by exteriour objects, which are oftentimes ſuch, as do cauſe ſo violent an agitation of the Spirits, that we may with but little skill in Phiſiogmony ſee the Tipes and Signatures of mens affections in their Countenances, and aſſure our ſelves of a better accompt from their faces, when their paſſions are moved (which do alwayes faithfully more or leſs imprint their characters in the exteriour parts of the body) then we may expect from their tongues, which can cover the deceiptfulnes of a falſe heart, when yet the viſage diſcovers its motions and deſignes; for if a mans ſpeech belye his heart, yet his face ſhall belye his ſpeech, and the underſtanding can never ſo ſecretly work, but the ſences will perceive it: I may not but conjecture that Doctor Hamond is better learned in this kinde of ſcience then my ſelf, having vantage ground of me in years, ſtudy and experience, and yet he hath gone farther in diſcovering himſelf, and his paſſions then thus, in his Vindication againſt E. P. and (contrary to his profeſſed impaſſionateneſs) hath ſo far betrayed himſelf, as to tranſmit the Image and Character of the perturbation and paſſionate heat of his ſpirit, by his Pen, to the view of the world, as his ſaid Vindication will manifeſtly teſtify.
And I wiſh this parti-coloured Doctor (that doth thus interlace excellent profeſſions with ſo little adequateneſs of performance page missing words of Moſes in Terminis, Exod. 21. 6. but whether they do not widely range from them, I refer it to any man that hath his underſtanding about him upon compare, to judge; I conceived this Doctors affirmation to be but his explication of that place, and beleeve the impartiall examiner of both places will eaſily finde it ſo; and I muſt tell this Doctor for all this, that he will alone lye under that Condemnation which, ſaith he, in his fifth Section, E. P. hath put him, and the Scripture under, too good a Companion to be of that mans ſide, that made and publiſhed the late Miſterium Religionis recognitum, which goodly ſtuff came out of this Doctors ware-houſe.
2. The ſecond advantage is not onelyonly as imaginary as the other, but palpably falſe and ſcandalous, contrary to the Candidneſs and ingenuitie of a rationall man: 'This Doctor ſaith that E. P. hath two irreconſilable opinions Sect. 7. of his vindicacion: 1. Opinion, That it ſhould be unlawfull for the Iew to give up his liberty or freedome, and that ſervitude ſhould be unnaturall. Secondly, That it ſhould be in a mans own power to kill himſelf; I am aſtoniſhed that any man who hath his eyes in his head, or any conſcience to check him, or any ſencible movement of reaſon in him, ſhould affirm ſuch an untruth of E. P. Let this Doctor indigitate the place, and ſhew them in verbâ, if he can; but that the reader may know the truth, there is no ſuch opinions in E. P. his diſcourſe; and it is hoped this Doctor may receive credit according to the truth of what he affirms here, in whatſoever elſe he hath and ſhall have to repreſent to the world hereafter, who (it ſeemes) will leave no way unaſſayed, that may (right or wrong) promote the wicked diſigne of his party: I ſhall eaſily beleeve henceforward he may be ſo plyable a Courtier, as if his King or his party ſhall ſay it is night at highnoone, he will not ſtick to maintaine it; or if any ſhould be ſo ventrous as to deny it, that he is ſo cunning as to have this reſerve for himſelf, as to ſay he hath miſtaken the Moon for the Sun, yet I do not ſee for all his art, but he will have a long voyage before he come to the end of his expectation, by ſuch ſhamefull and unworthy ſtaining of his Antagoniſts.
But for the firſt of theſe opinions he mentions, doth he not finde the contrary in E. P. pag. 18. and 19. and doth he not cite E. P. his opinion in page II. and Section 28. of his vindicacion, in theſe words: That God doth not allow any to take away mans life, but thoſe whom he makes Gods (i. e.) Magiſtrates: ſufficient to excuſe E. P. from this part of the Doctors charge, who with the ſame breath and pen he hath aſperſed that Author, doth (as you ſee) proclaime his innocency to the world; and for the other opinion charged upon the Author of E. P. That it was unlawfull for the Jew to paſs away his freedome, &c. it is likewiſe denied by that Author; and this Doctor (who is his accuſer) cites alſo his opinion in this point in his vindicacion, Page 8. Section 28. That an unreſerved reſignation of a mans native libertie into the hands of any mans whatſoever, without any juſt Condition, or adequate exchange, can have on origination from God or reaſonable nature: Now whether this Doctor hath dealt ingeniouſly with E. P. let any man judge.
I ſhall now come to make good what Eutactus Philodemius did urge in relation to this Doctors affirmation and Queſtion.
E. P. in his aforementioned diſcourſe of the originall and end of civill powers (under the firſt head, page the fifth of that diſcourſe) viz. That the people were (under God) the originall and efficient cauſe of all juſt powers) was ſpeaking that the people could not paſs away their own native rights out of themſelves into any other hand, to their own evident damage, without any poſſible advantage of recall, and no ſuch thing could be rationably gathered but of their conſent, to ſet up a Magiſtrate over themſelves, and in caſe the Magiſtrate ſo ſet up by themſelves over them, ſhould encroach upon their rights, beyond the due limits of his commiſſion, and the mutuall pacts, either expreſs, or neceſſarily implyed between them, then God, nature, and reaſon did prompt unto the people, their own ſafety, together with the uſe of means to recover and retain it, when the interchangeable conditions between them were violated by their Governour.
And I ſhall add this further to what was then ſaid. That the Governour and the Governed are relatives, and undergo (when they come to be ſuch) mutuall duties, the willfull breach whereof by either party makes the *Propter pactum non ſervatum privatur quis jure ſuo. Bracton p. 2. l 1. c 4. Bartumas de Repub. Judaeorum. pag. 1, 2, 3. Triglandius de poteſtate Civili & Eccl. c. 2 p. 49. See a late Book called Bonds & Boundsobligation ceaſe as to the other, & there is then a cleer divorce made by nature and reaſon between them, and if the End of a peoples Being, be to glorify God, and to love his Neighbour (as doubtleſs it is) then Magiſtracy is but a ſubſervient end to that of the peoples well being; and a Magiſtrate is but a neceſſary circumſtance, to that end that he may be an encouragement to the good, and a terror to the evill, and that men might live while they are in this ſhort Pilgrimage in all Godlineſs, and honeſty; and it is irrationall to think that a civill Magiſtrate, who is but ſuch a circumſtance to a peoples well being (of whom there had been no need, if there had been no fin) ſhould make the people ſubſerve his own end, and become a footſtoole to his pompe and glory; Such an end is abhorred in the thoughts of all rationall Spirits, who have not imbibed a principle of ſlavery, or are not ſo ſupine, as not to enquire of any other condition, better then an aſſe like ſubjection to the lawleſs wills of men.
Now to come neerer to the affirmation laid down by the Doctor in his addreſs to the Generall and Councell of war, page 9. and touched upon by Eutactus Philodemius occaſionally (viz.) That the Iew under Gods own Government might wholly give up himſelf and his freedome to his Maſters will (power of life only exempted) What power the Jew had from right nature to diſpoſe of himſelf & liberty. Probus uſus voluntatis eſt melioris electio ejuſque quod rationi arridet non quod adulatur paſsionibus. Euſeb. Nieremb. de voluntatis arte. Juſtin. l. 1. titulo 3. See alſo Bracton lib. 1. ca. 6.and of a freeman become a ſlave for ever.
Firſt therefore Eutactus Philodemius alledgeth as before, that it was not from nature, i. e. rightly chooſing, that the Iew had ſuch a power, but that God permitted it to be ſo, and ſure he is, that the Doctor cannot prove that ſlavery was congenial, or naturall to Adam, Nemo naſcitur Servus, if Adam had ſtood in innocency, and had had the like innocent and unſtained poſterity; it cannot be made appear that any of them ſhould have been ſlaves by nature; ſlavery is an effect and conſequent of ſin, and Adams poſterity could not have ſo unrectified wills as to deſire to ſtoop to a ſlaviſh condition, it is a ſlaviſh Diſpoſition that muſt be a cauſe of a ſlaviſh Condition, and it would be as difficult a thing to diſprove this, as for the Doctor to make good his tenet, That Adams poſterity ſhould in caſe of innnocent nature, have poſitive humane laws impoſed on them by man, in order to a civill life, and if it be allowed that ſervitude was not Connaturall before the fall, it cannot be after, and as for the word (unnaturall) which was uſed by E. P. as an Epithete to the word (Servitude) I ſay thus much in ſatisfaction to the Doctor, abſolutè multa dicuntur quae tamen intelliguntur comparativè, But Juſtinian tels this Doctor that Servitus eſt conſtitutio Iuris gentium, quâ quis Dominio alieno, contra naturam Subjicitur, which is his definition of ſlavery, and immediately before the Doctor may find Liberty or Freedom to receive another definition, Juſtin. ibid. & Bracton ibid.viz. Libertas eſt naturalis facultas ejus, quod cuique facere libet, niſi ſi quid vi, aut jure prohibetur, when this Doctor hath either reconciled or overthrown theſe two Definitions, I may be of another minde.
And now if I be ſo bold with this Doctor on the behalf of Eutactus Philodemius, as to ask him ſome few Queſtions, who being himſelf ſo great a Queriſt in his addreſs to the Generall and Councell of war, will doubtleſs grant the like, leave to any other man that will be candid with him; the firſt Queſtion ſhall be.
Queſt. Whether if Adam had not faln, there ſhould have been 1.any ſlaves in Innocency?
Queſt. Whether, according to thoſe equal and uniform Laws 2.which Polititians and others call the Primary Laws of Nature, Naturalem rei cujuſlibet inclinationem, there would have been Jura naturalia ſunt imutahilia, libertas quae eſt de jure naturali per jus Gentium auferri non poteſt. Bracton li. 1. cap. 5. Ariſt. lib. 1. Pol. c. 3.ſlavery in the world; indeed there are other ſecondary Laws of Nature, called by ſome demi conſtrained, and demy-voluntary, which are more ſtinted Laws, and much remote from theſe ingenuous Dictates, to which this Doctor may (if he pleaſe) refer the ſervitude or ſlavery that he mentions; as when a Merchant throws his goods over-board to ſave himſelf, or when a Patient is willing to cut an arm or leg to ſave his life, or ſtare promiſſis nemini laedere; theſe ſecondary Laws are modelled, and made in the Forge of neceſſity, and are its Conſtitutions (as Ariſtotle ſaith) theſe are not neer ſo undeterminate, free, and unconſtrained, as thoſe primary Laws of Nature: and thoſe words of the Apoſtle mentioned by this Doctor, If thou canſt be free, chooſe it rather; as it is the voice of Gods own Spirit, ſo we may hear in it a ſound or noiſe of reviving and returning Nature to its Primitive principle of Rectitude, and true Freedom.
Queſt. Whether between thoſe relatas of Maſter and Servant, there 3.were not at leaſt implyed conditional reſpects, and a mutual pacts; as that the Maſter ſhould give protection & maintenance to his ſervant, in compenſation of the ſervants love and ſervice to his Maſter.
Queſt. Whether, if it ſhould be granted, that the Jew had lawfully ſuch an abſolute diſpoſe of himſelf by Nature, as this Doctor would 4.have it, his poſterity were obliged ſucceſſively to be ſlaves to his Maſter, and his poſterity, and have their ears boared in token thereof, and ſhould be as abſolutely exempt from releaſe and manumiſſion, as their father is pretended to be; if the Doctor cannot prove this, then the deſign of his addreſs to the General, and Counſel of War for the ſupport of the Royal Cauſe, ſtands upon a very feeble foundation.
Queſt. Whether the deſire of true Freedom and Liberty was not an inherent native principle, and a habitude of mans minde in Innocency, ….and if that be granted, whether the Doctor can make it appear (by a parity of reaſon) that the deſire and love of ſervitude and ſlavery was as true and innate a habit of a ſinleſs and untainted ſoul, which if he denies, I have my end; but if he affirms, then he muſt neceſſarily argue, That becauſe deſire of Liberty was then a congenial principle, therefore a deſire of ſervitude was a habit equally inbred in Nature, what degree of likeneſs there is between theſe two of Liberty and Servitude (I know not) unleſs what is very neer between two contraries, there is too great a diſparity beween them, that the Doctor ſhould have ſo plauſible and colourable an Argument here, as he that ſaid Wooll and Snow are both white, and therefore they are equally warm, but let this paſs, it is but a Royal ſtride of a well affected Levite to his own cauſe.
The 2. Anſ. of Eutactus Philodemius was, That the boaring of the 2. The boaring of the Jews ear a puniſhment, as well as a cerimony of admiſſion into ſervice.ear was a puniſhment of the contempt of that liberty wch he had, and might have lawfully kept without ſin, that ſlavery is an effect of ſin, is not doubted by very rational men, had there been no ſin, doubtleſs there had been no ſlavery & boaring of the ear was an ordinary mark of ſlavery, as Diodati, Cornelius à lapide. Ainſworth, and divers others explain the forementioned place of Exod. 21. 6. and from the 25. of Levit. 41. ſome of the Rabbies do infer, That a Prieſt was exempted from this boaring of the ear, becauſe he ſhould become thereby blemiſhed, and if his ear ſhould be boared, he could not be reinveſted again in his Prieſtly dignities: Why this boaring of the Prieſts ears ſhould be a blemiſh, and this blemiſh exclude him from his dignities, I deſire the Doctor to tell me. In 25 Levit. 42. we may ſee in what love God is with the ſlavery and ſervitude of his people, who uſed much means to keep them from it, as you may ſee there, where ſpeaking of the Jews (God ſaith) They ſhall not be ſold as bondmen, and the fifth of Nehem. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. we have the minde of God in theſe words; We after our ability have redeemed our brethren, which were ſold unto the Heathen, and will you even ſell your brethren? and ſhall they be ſold unto us? they held their peace and had nothing to anſwer; & I ſuppoſe the reaſon of that place of Cor. 7. If thou canſt be free, chooſe it rather, is very ſutable and conſiſtent herewith. And as it is not denied, but that the boaring of the ear was a Ceremony of the receiving, and admiſſion of ſervants amongſt the Jews, yet how the telling us it was a Ceremony, doth diſprove it was a Puniſhment, doth not appear to me; this Doctor tells the world, that the boaring of the ear was no painful thing; ſure I am, if Maymonie, and other Hebrew Rabbies may be believed (whom in this thing I had rather give credit to, then this Doctor) it was the Jews right ear that was boared, and it was through the middle it was boared, & whether this was painful or no, I had rather this Doctor ſhould be Probationer, then I, who it ſeems is in ſo much love with Servitude, that as he knows not how to live himſelf in any other Element then this, ſo he would have no other man ſo happy as to be out of that condition; And for the place urged by the Doctor out of Pſal 40. 6. to inforce his opening about boaring the ear that Prophetical ſaying of David touching Chriſt, Mine ear haſt thou opened, (i. e.) bored (ſaith he) The Doctor ſaith it is acknowledged, that the opening of the ear there, doth denote that Chriſt took upon him the form of a Servant. I do not know how his opinion croſſeth mine, for as Chriſt took upon him the form of a Servant, were not the puniſhment of our ſins laid uphim, and was not his being in the form of a ſervant, part of that puniſhment of our ſins? Let this Doctor tell me.
But as to the Doctors Explication of the aforementioned place, What the meaning of the opening the ear in Pſal. 40. 6 is.let him not be offended if I be of another opinion, though he ſaith it is acknowledged, &c. As if he would perſwade the Reader there could be no appeal to a higher Reaſon, or a Liberty of a juſt inquiry into the Truth of Scripture beyond his line, and thoſe of his opinion: I conceive it is meant otherwiſe, and therefore do lay my opinion at the feet of the ingenuous Reader; The words are properly in Engliſh rendred thus, Ears to me haſt thou digged, (i. e.) opened or fitted, and not Mine ears haſt thou opened (i. e.) boared, there is a great difference in ſence between the word foreign perforavit, Exod. 21. 6. The word foreign dedit, applicuit, oppoſuit. Deut. 15. 16. and the word uſed by the Spirit of God in this place (viz.) Pſal. 40. 6. which is foreign effodit, comparavit, though the Doctor would have them be Synonima's, if the Doctor pleaſe, he may do E. P. a favor to ſatisfie him a little better herein, and tell he do it, the opinion of E. P. ſtands good; for all his pretended ſelf authoritative aſſertion, and for the cloſe of this Doctors fifth Section, E. P. is not ſo poſſeſſed with a Stoicall Apathy, as not to have a ſence of his unſavory Jeare (a Character of the goodneſs of his cauſe) and therefore tells him in his own words in another place, upon another occaſion, That he will be ſilent, rather then imitate that part of his Spirit, though there be in his vindication the advantages of many oppoſite retortions.
The third anſwer to the Doctors explanation of that place of Exod. 21. 6. That the Iewiſh Servant did not give up himſelf to 3. Slave, an unfit expreſſion to call the Jewiſh ſervant by.be a ſlave for ever, but his ſlavery did terminate in the yeare of Iubite, here the Doctor obſtreperouſly vaunts over his opponent, yet he that takes ſeriouſly the weight of this mans arguments, will finde (I preſume) his virulency and malice poyzing more in the ſcale, then his reaſon: I muſt confeſs, that if a ſmooth dialect, and an exquiſite texture of words could overcloud a truth, this Doctor can do as much as any towards it: He ſhall be a ſlave, &c. it were well the Guliel. Gibieuf. de libert. Dei & creaturae. l. 1. p. 29. ca. 5. Sect. 5. Non niſi res obvias percipiunt brutorum more, mentes habent fraenis vinctus. Guliei. Gibieuf. l. 1. c. 32. Sect. 17. p. 244.Doctor could afford the ſervant Iew (whom the Chaldee renders a ſon of Iſrael) a better tearme then ſlave (this is a word well becoming them that would not out of neceſſity, but out of choice, and with all their induſtry make themſelves ſo) it may be the Doctor expounds this place by that in Rev. 18. 19. foreign an appoſite word to denominate a ſlave by, a body without a ſoul; that ſerved onelyonly to keep it from ſtinking, Tales rationem potius ſentiunt quam habent: nec ratione uti, nec ratiocinari poſſunt ut inde eliciant quid agendum, quid fugiendum, I doubt many of this Levites party in theſe latter times have had the motions of their ſouls chained to the Galley of their bodies, or at the leaſt they have been partes animatae domini, and have had their ſouls and reaſons quieſſent, while the Royall will poſſeſſed and acted their bodies as it pleaſed; who can be fitter tooles for the hand of tyranny to hew down the tree of juſt liberty, then ſuch ſlaves? but while this Doctor is telling us this Iew was a ſlave, the truth drops from him unawares, and he tells us pag. 9. and 23. that ſubjection (which The ſeverall ſignifications of the word [for ever] in Scripture.was the condition of this Iewiſh ſervant) is far removed from ſlavery, &c.
But I come to that which the Doctor much ſticks at; E. P. affirmed that this Jewiſh ſervant did not, or could not paſs away his liberty to his Maſter for ever, but this word (for ever) did refer to the year of Iubile, or the great ſabbatick year, where his ſervice to his maſter did terminate: This Doctor tells the world, theſe words do not well conſiſt with the words of Moſes, Exod. 21. 6. he ſhall ſerve him for ever, without the leaſt diſproofe of it, but ſaying ſo, yet (though I might reſt here, and ſay over again the ſame words till this Doctor be able to overthrow this opinion) I ſhall tell him that this word [for ever] hath reſpect to ſeverall times in ſcripture; Sometimes it ſignifies till Chriſts coming, as Exod. 12. 14. ſometimes for a long time, as Prov. 29. 14. Dan. 3. 9. Levit. 25. 40. Pſal. 89. 1. with which this (for ever) agrees, and ſometimes alſo it doth reach to eternity, as Iſaiah 45. 17. But the Doctor ſaith that this Iew had by a voluntary refuſall of his liberty at the Sabbatick year, made himſelf a ſlave for ever, and had no benefit of any after releaſe, or manumiſſion; he had thereby made himſelf uncapable of his freedome, and had no poſſible future remedy though his condition be never ſo miſerable, and he never ſo deſirous of returning to a condition of liberty again; this poor Iew is adjudged by this Doctor to be in a hard condition and ſo ſhould we all be, if this Doctor could have had his will, and ſeen the end of his deſire; this is but one Doctors opinion, without any proof, the Iew (ſaith he) did at the Sabbatick year, out of his love to his Maſter, voluntarily prefer ſervice to his Maſter, before his freedome, therefore he had no refuge or relief from the year of The Jews ſurrender of himſelf to his Maſters ſervice, did not put him in an irreverſible eſtate.Iubile; firſt he ſaith it is ſo, and then he throwes a little dirt upon it for proof.
But I muſt tell this Doctor, that this voluntary Surrender made by the Iew of himſelf, did not put him in an irreverſible condition, if it may be called a voluntary ſurrender, for (as I take it) this Iew had wife and Children, whom he is ſaid to love, Exod. 21. 5. as well as his maſter; and I conceive that there was duty and neceſſity that did call upon him to cohabite with his wife, which was a greater bent upon his will, then his love to his Maſter, to ſerve him till The Jews ſurrender of himſelf to his Maſters ſervice, not abſolutely voluntary. Lev. 156.they were alſo free. It ſeemes to me a ſtrange thing for any man to offer to conclude this Iew (who as the Doctor ſaith) hath voluntarily given up his liberty to his Maſter at the ſabbatick year) ſhould be exempt from the benefit of that foreign Sabboth of reſt, That the whole land ſhould have, when there was releaſe of Mortgages and redemption of lands to thoſe that were able, and a freedome gratis to thoſe that were not, Levit. 25. and ſure this Iew could not be kept off from the benefit of that Iubile which was after ſeaven Sabboths of years, i. e. fifty years. On the tenth day of the ſeaventh monethmonth, in the day of Atton…ment ſhall you make the trumpet to ſound throughout all the Land, and you ſhall hallow the fiftyeth year, and proclaime liberty throughout ALL the Land, to all the Inhabitants thereof, and it ſhall be a Iubile to you, viz. Iews, and you ſhall return EVERY man to his poſſeſſion, and you ſhall return EVERY man unto his family, Levit. 25. 9, 10. And I finde nothing that hath not in this Chapter the benefit of the year of Iubile, but the houſe in the The houſe in the walled City, and the ſtranger only exempted from manumiſſion at the Jubile.Walled City. and the Stranger, the houſe in ver. 30. (if it were not redeemed within a year after it was ſold) ſhould be ſtabliſhed to him that bought it for ever, throughout all genetations, and not go out at the Iubile; the Stranger in ver. 45. ſhould be their poſſeſſion for ever, and the inheritance of their Children; but God tells the Iews, as to their brethren they ſhould ſerve them till the year of Iubile, and then they and their children ſhould depart, and return into their own poſſeſſion and family, for ſaith God, they are my Servants, and they ſhall not be ſold as bond men, ver. 40, 41, 42. and ver. 55. and this is moſt evident, that he that was able to pay the price of his redemption, might go out at the ſabbatick year, and he that was not, ſhould gratis be free at the year of Iubile. Let this Doctor tell me whether God is not here ſo great a favourer of the liberty of his people, that he that hath made the moſt unthrifty bargain for himſelf, hath the advantage of a time of releaſe: And I ſhall add for better confirmation of what is here alledged, a little more, (if the word of God needed any earthly advocate) Let this Doctor conſult Raſchi, Aben Eſram, and Diodati, and he ſhall find them unaminouſly ſay this [for ever] in Exod. 21. 6. did refer to the year of Iubile, and terminate there, and Cornelius à Lapide upon this place hath this Critciſme foreign for ever having a Hholem without a. foreign. (as you will finde it in this place) ſignifies till the year of Iubile, but when it hath a foreign. for its Hholem, it intends a long time, or to eternity, as you may finde it to have in the aforementioned place of Iſaiah 45. 17. foreign uſ que ad ſeculum eternitatis, and Buxtorſius renders this word in this place ſpacium 50. annorum, the ſpace or tearm of 50. years, the laſt year whereof was the great Sabbatick year; I hope I have hereby given ſatisfaction to all unprejudicate Readers; and if this Doctor ſhall not yet think himſelf ſatisfied, I cannot at preſent do him further ſervice.
But this Doctor ſaith, That though it were granted to E. P. that this Jew were to be ſet free at the next Sabbatick year, or the great year of Jubile, pag. 7. of the Doctors Vindication, Sect. 18. yet E. P. could not avoid his concludency of the lawfulneſs of paſſing away his freedom, which (ſaith he) in another place in his Vindication includes his all but Life. But yet though E. P. did acknowledg Liberty might be exchanged upon Adequate conſideration, as is acknowledged by this Doctor, Pag. 8. Sect. 28. This Dr. muſt know, That when the The Jews poſſeſſions out of his Maſters power, proved, notwithſtanding Dr. H. confident aſſertion.Jew did paſs away his Freedom, &c. to his Maſters Will, it doth not appear that his Maſter had any power of his poſſeſſions, which (in the Doctors ſenſe) is part of his Freedom, and his All by his making himſelf a ſlave, for in Livit. 25. 41. when the ſervant Jew was ſet free from his ſervitude, he was to RETURN to his own Family, and to return unto the poſſeſſion of his Fathers; which word [Return] doth clearly manifeſt that his poſſeſſions were out of his Maſters power or liberty of diſpoſe, and as to the Jew himſelf, his Maſter had but the bare uſu-fruit of him, not that cauſalis uſus fructus, whereby Minſing. lib. 2. Titul. 4.the Civilian intends propriety, for he was not his Lord proprietary; what is the deſign of this Doctor by this opinion of the Jews freedom, being wholly in his Maſters power without releaſe, is eaſily ſeen, it is but by way of parallel, to put our Perſons and Eſtates in the abſolute diſpoſe of the Royal Will without poſſibility of recall.
I now haſten to waſh E. P. from the ſtains that this Doctors Pen E. P. his opinion touching power of life, cleared from the mal…ce of Doctor Hamond.hath beſpattered him with in his ſecond Point, concerning the power of life, which man hath over himſelf: And here I muſt profeſs to the world (as well as this Doctor) that I ſhould have little thought E. P. ſhould be rendred to the world, a man that held Self-murder lawful, an opinion point blank contrary to the ſixth Commandement: They that read Eutactus Philodemius his Book will (I am ſure) finde the contrary in expreſs terms, in the 18, 19, 20. pages of his Book; and to this puopoſe is this Doctor, who is his Adverſary therein, become his Advocate, pag 11. of his Vindication, and Sect. 28. before mentioned, viz. That no man hath power of life committed to him, but the Magiſtrate.
I am not willing to take up every exceſs of this Doctors excrementitious Pen, his malice hardly admitting of definitive bounds; or to tell him where he doth but ſay over again what E. P. ſaid before; Now not to ſpeak here of that duty and neceſſity that lies upon men to lay down their lives for Chriſt, or when they do Heroically hazard the ſame for their Countries good, &c. which is acknowledged by E. P. and infiſted upon needleſly by this Doctor, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19. pages of his Vindication. I haſten to tell the Reader firſt the Opinion E. P. held, and then the Occaſion thereof: You may finde E. P. his Opinion to be this, pag. 19. which is ſet down by way of Queſtion, (viz) Whether God and nature hath inveſted man with ſuch a power over his own life, as freely to conſent that his life ſhould be taken away, or willingly to expoſe the ſame, as a private man, to death, for a greater, a publiker good, (viz.) for the preſervation of ſocieties, and the lives of many others.
The innocency of this Opinion (I hope) needs no Apology, notwithſtanding the ſlanderous Tongue and Pen of this man, whom I challenge to ſhew a contrary opinion to this aſſerted by E. P. Or that there are any ſuch words in Terminis aſſerted by him, as this Doctor doth charge him withall; Well Doctor, now you have ſlandered, to make the world believe you in your ſlander, muſt be your next deſign. And truly (Sir,) one of your profeſſion, that had not the conſcience to forbear the firſt, I fear may have too much credit with them that believe lies in the laſt. But Doctor take heed, the Fly that biteth the Tortois breaketh her beak, and if you ſpurn and La moſcha che ponge la …artaruca rompie il becco.bite againſt Truth, it will at length make you repent; your own Pen is a better friend to Truth then you would have it be, which (after all your malice) will not be ſilenced from clearing the innocency of E. P. See Vindic. pag. 11. Sect. 28. before mentioned.
The occaſion of Eutactus Philodemius ſpeaking of the Point before-mentioned, was this: He had before ſpoken of the original and end of civil powers, and urged that the people were the firſt, and common ſeat and ſubject of all Civil Powers, and now he was ſpeaking how the Magiſtrate was the proper and formal ſubject or receptacle Forteſcue de laudibus legum Angliae, pag. 31. c. 13.of this power from the people, who are the immediat root (next to God) of this formal power in the Magiſtrate; for the better clearing whereof, I add thus much out of Forteſcue, Chief Juſtice, and afterwards Chancellor to Hen. 6. His words are theſe. In a body Politick, the intent of the people is the firſt living thing, having within it blood, that is politick proviſion for the Utility and Commonwealth of the ſame people, which it imparteth, as well to the head, as to the members of the ſame body; And a little before he ſaith, As out of an Embrion ariſeth a body natural, ſo out of a multitude of people ariſeth a Kingdom. And Contzen, in lib. 5. pol. c. 8. Parag. 5. &c. Upon that place of Scripture, Non eſt poteſtas niſi à Deo, i. e. There is no power but of God (ſaith he) Cum Reſpublica conſtituta eſt, in ejus (i. e. dei) poteſtate eſt, regimen Monarchicum, vel Ariſtocraticum, vel populi politiam inſtituere, at que ita reſpub. à Deo primo & immediate eſt: Magiſtratus ab ea (i e. Rep.) deſignati à Deo mediatè à populo immediate poteſtate habent quae ex natura rei, eſt TOTA in Communitate primo & immediate. And this Dr. will find further. that the Ius legum condendarum, i. e. right of making Laws, or a legiſlative power (which infallibly includes power of life) that greateſt Ingredient of Supremacy) is in & de ipſa republica (as the ſame Contzen affirmeth) ſeu hominum multitudine, non uno quopiam, Iamdudum (ſaith he) exploſa eſt iſta Canoniſtarum quorundarum opinio qui naturâ hanc poteſtatem ſupremo principi & ſucceſſoribus tribuerunt, ipſa respublica jus ſuae Gubernationis, & legum tantum habet, ſi naturam ſ…ectes, ideo CONDERE LEGES & magiſtratum ſibi preficere poteſt & CONFERRE in eum POTESTATEM legum condendarum, and every man almoſt knowes that Legis virtus eſt imperare vetare, permittere PƲNIRE (which I ſuppoſe this Doctor will confeſs doth include power of life) & premio afficere; and Contzen tells you that he is not alone of this opinion, but many other learned *Tho. Aquinas. quaeſt. 9. art. 3. & quaeſt 97. Molin. T. 1. inſt. Tract. 2. diſt. 22. Balarm. T. 1. lib. 3. de laicis.men, and he gives this reaſon for his own opinion, nullus in alium habet poteſtatem, niſi aliena voluntate vel delicto, to which I will add that of Bracton lib. 1. cap. 4. propter delictum vel pactum non ſervatum privatur quis jure ſuo, and it is true, par in parem non habet poteſtatem, and ſaith he further, no man can claime this power of making laws, and of life naturally to be in himſelf either by vertue of Seniority, Primogeniture, or paternall right, as his due; the people firſt had it in themſelves, and they give it their Governors: I ſuppoſe he that will but compare what is here aſſerted with the opinion of E. P. in page 19. will finde no diſcord between them, as is moſt evident in the caſe of the ten men in the freedome of nature, 9. whereof did ſpontaneouſly ſubject themſelves to the 10th. to be governed by him, according to ſuch Laws as ſhould be for mutual good, and againſt mutuall Injuries; one of the nine kils his fellow ſubject, the tenth man, whom his own Vote and Conſent (amongſt the reſt) ſet up to be a Magiſtrate, and impowred to make and execute Laws, put him to death: now in what meaſure the power of life is derived to the Magiſtrate, from the Conſent and vote of the people, is eaſily concluded by *Mr. Hobbs, one of this Doctors party, though a man of dangerous, and unſound principles in other reſpects, yet in this agrees with E. P. That power of Coertion, of the Sword, and conſequently of Life, is tranſferred from the People to the Magiſtrate. Hobs de corp. polit. par. 2. c. 1.rationall men; and though this intereſſed Doctor doth undertake to make good in his ſaid vindication, That †Doctor Hamonds Vindication, pag. 20. Sect. 53.power of life flowes from a higher principle upon the Magiſtrate, then from the peoples conſent, it proceeding from them onelyonly as the Cauſa ſine quâ non, or by way of reſultance, and God onelyonly communicating power of life to the Governor, and mans conſent that he ſhould be his Governor remotely (and by way of condition, or qualifying of the ſubject to a capacity of receiving that power from God) concurring to the veſting of that power in that perſon, like the temper of the aire, that contributes to the qualifying of the ſlime or putrid matter to receive the ſame influences, which influences onelyonly beget life in it: This being (as I take it) more then he acknowledges elſewhere in his ‖Doctor Hamonds Addreſs pag. 11.Pamphlet to the Generall and Councell of war (called his Addreſs) I ſhall ſhew you how the Ingenuity of this Doctor or his pen hath gone a little further, in his late *Doctor Hamonds Reaſonableneſs of Chriſtian Religion, Cap. 4. Sect. 4. pag. 99.Book, viz. whereſoever ſupremacy of Power is placed by the lawes of a Kingdom, there ſubjection is required, &c. from both which I ſhall urge thus much, Power of life is an ingredient (yea the greateſt ingredient of ſupremacy, as this †Addreſs, Pag. 10.Doctor acknowledges) Supremacy is veſted in the Magiſtrate by the laws, and the Lawes are made by the people (that is) collectively or repreſentatively; how then can this Doctor deny the people to derive any power of life to the Magiſtrate: it cannot be denyed but Gods approbation muſt concur to the right veſting of this power of life in the Magiſtrate, yet doth it not appear but that God hath inveſted them with this power naturally. The magiſtrate can make no law whatſoever that can be good, which is not either expreſs or implied in the revealed will of the great Lawgiver, his work is onelyonly to regulate and diſpoſe all humane actions to the Common benefit and preſervation of that publike ſociety over which he is, and to be an inſtrument Lex eſt quidem rationis ordinatio ad bonum commune. Aquinas.of Terror to thoſe that will not ſubmit to the Laws held forth by God for the benefit of mankind: Lawes are made for to be the cōmon ſtandard & meaſure of mens actions, & for the coertion of their wills, offending right Reaſon, and conſequently tranſgreſſing the Will of God, the fountain thereof; and the Civil Magiſtrate is the inſtrument whereby that is done, and hath his immediate miſſion from the people for that end, and approbation from God, or his permiſſion at the leaſt, either of which (in reſpect of them that are ſubjects) is ſufficient to make him a Magiſtrate to command obedience and compliance in order to theſe ends. This was the Author of E. P. his opinion in other words, as the Reader may eaſily find in the 18, 19, 20. pages of that Book. The place of Scripture to make his opinion good, Rom. 5. 7. is acknowledged by this Doctor, 21. page of his Vindication, Sect. 55. wherein he is of that Authors minde: I muſt come to this cloſe (when I conſider this Doctors Vindication) and am of this opinion, that he was reſolved to charge the Author of E. P. with two contradictory opinions, and with holding an opinion, that Self-murder was lawful though he proves neither, but what matters that, let E. P. clear himſelf as well as he can: Well done Dr. you are not it ſeems unacquainted with the Principles of Nicholas the Florentine. I need not tell you the reſt of his name. I have done with you, hoping the Lord will never put me into the hands of ſo uncandid an adverſary again, though I know the drift and deſign of your book was againſt them that have croſſed your Court-expectation, and have not liſtened to the charms of your late Addreſs, rather then againſt E. Philodemius.
And now (Reader) having done with this uncandid Antagoniſt, I turn my ſelf to thee, and wiſh thee, if wel-affected (as for others, I leave them their own way) to a civil Government, and there-under to enjoy thy ſelf, and thy properties in peace, according to that natural inſtinct that is in every ſociable rational creature, that thou wilt not be carried away with the ſubtile inſinuations of them who are Wolves in Sheeps clothing, and lie in waite to deceive thee concerning the preſent Powers, and their Aſſertors; make uſe of thine own Reaſon, and be not hurled to and fro with the ſwinge and rapt of that Billingſgate Rhetorick, which proceeds from ſuch as this Doctor and his party, who chooſing to avoid the naturnal and ſober courſe of Reaſon, make Railings their Reaſonings againſt any that ſtand in the way to their Intereſts and Ends. This Doctor by a plauſible Tongue and Pen hath done much miſchief in his way; his courſe of writing hath been like the Waterman, who looks one way, and rows another; Let any man almoſt judge of him that hath heard of him, or knows his Writings, whether though he gives the good man his left hand of profeſſion, the profane Cavalier hath not his right hand of fellowſhip; with that he is homogeneous in profeſſion, with this he incorporates; in his heart there is Royalty effigiated, and his ſpirit is ductile onelyonly to that Intereſt, though with the pen of an Artizan he delineates and holds forth the fair face of Religion, and would be thought to be Indenizened her ſubject. I ſeriouſly think that Story of the Batt is moſt appoſite to this man; The Batt when he came among the birds; they would not own him, becauſe he had feet and teeth like a beaſt, and when he would be entertained among the beaſts, they would not own him, becauſe he had wings like a bird. It hath been the unhappy priviledge of this mans parts, not ſo much to act, as to teach diſobedience to the preſent Authoririty and Powers, and therefore I think that each fault in him (and ſuch as he is) is not ſo much a Crime, as a Rule of error, and a preſident to do evil. I ſhall now take my leave of thee (Reader,) and with a word touching preſent Powers, (not the lawfulneſs of obeying it, that is already proved▪) but the commendableneſs of it, though in ſome things it may uſe power irregularly. Thou wilt ſay, That though Oppreſſers are removed, yet Oppreſſion in a great meaſure remains ſtill; for heretofore we had good Laws, but bad Magiſtrates, and therefore could not expect that ſecurity to our perſons and properties as was due to us. But now thou wilt ſay, we have good Magiſtrates, as well as good Laws, what hinders our Jubile of Peace, freedom, plenty, and ſecurity. I ſhall give thee this one anſwer. That thou muſt not expect while thou liveſt an even and a perpetual tenor of happineſs in the enjoyment of a throughly well-tuned Government; the fineſt, and moſt refined on earth will have ſome courſe thread of irregularity, nay, of Oppreſsion in it, it will have its Remiſſions and Intentions, ſome mixture of bad with good; Art thou not freed from much Oppreſſion, Tyranny, and lawleſs Intrenchments, upon ſoul and body? therefore bear a little, and forbear: The beſt of Magiſtrates, though called Gods, are but men, and ſhall die like men. Think that ſome inconveniences and miſchiefs (like Ivy, twiſting it ſelf about an Oke) will ſtick to the beſt of Governments, and that a Roſe hath its prickles as well as its flowers. I muſt confeſs that that State is in a ſad caſe, which is like that under the late King, whoſe Diſeaſes, and diſtempers are (as the Phyſitian ſaith in another caſe of the natural body) Chronick and continuate, or ſetled, not errant, but fixed and grown to a habit, which no rational man can ſay of the preſent Government, it being too yong for malice to ſtain it with ſuch an Ignominy. I have now done with thee, onelyonly I deſire that thou wilt diſmiſs me, with thy favorable cenſure of a well-meaning man, and that I did my beſt to ſatisfie thee, and I muſt tell thee alſo thus much, that though I did not what I ought, yet I did what I could.
FINIS.
End of the text · Antony Ascham, An Answer to the Vindication of Doctor Hammond (1650)